Saturday, October 31, 2015

At the end of my last Blog, which was written
over a year ago I wrote: “The sad fact is that
unlike in Theology and other well established disciplines, the field of
Religious Studies, possibly because of its interdisciplinary nature, appears to
suffer from a high level of outright plagiarism. This is an intolerable
situation that must change if the field is to survive as a serious area of
academic study.” At the time I intended to develop this theme with some new
thoughts on academic fraud. But, for a variety of reasons this never got done.
Therefore, I think it may be useful to republish my earlier work on plagiarism
so that the reader knows what I meant by my comment. So here it is:

How
serious a problem is academic plagiarism?Numerous
studies show that plagiarism and other types of academic fraud is increasing
among undergraduate students. For example in a recent article published by the
Center for Academic Integrity (CAI), Professor Don McCabe claims that "On
most campuses, 70% of students admit to some cheating" while
"Internet plagiarism is a growing concern" because although only
"10% of students admitted to engaging in such behavior in 1999, almost
40%" admitted to it in 2005" (CAI 2005). To date no one has measured
the extent of plagiarism among established academics although the indications
are that between 10% and 15% of books and theses in the Humanities and Social
Sciences contain unacceptable levels of plagiarized material (Daily Lobo,
5/3/2000; Kansas City Star, 02/15/2002; National Post August 30,
2003. page. A.6).

The
practice of plagiarism is a form of academic high treason because it undermines
the entire scholarly enterprise. How else do professors decide between a good
and a bad student, evaluate a candidate for an academic position, or grant
promotion to a fellow faculty member, if not on the basis of the belief that
their written work is actually their own work?

Therefore,
plagiarism must be prevented at all levels of academic life from student papers
to academic books. Nevertheless, care must be taken whenever one suspects a
writer of plagiarism. It cannot be stressed enough that everyone makes a few
mistakes and that genuine cases of similar use may occur. Consequently, what
must be identified are patterns of behavior, repetitive practices, and clear
indications of an attempt to deceive. The following paper attempts to identify
plagiarism and show how plagiarists weave their web of deception.

2. So
what is plagiarism?Defining plagiarism
is actually fairly easy. The Compact Edition of the Oxford English
Dictionary (COED) says that plagiarism is:

1. The action or practice of
plagiarizing; the wrongful appropriation or purloining, and publication as
one's own, of the ideas, or the expression of ideas (literary, artistic,
musical, mechanical, etc.) of another.

2. A purloined idea, design,
passage, or work. (COED 1971:2192)

According to the same dictionary,
to purloin means:

To make away with,
misappropriate, or take dishonestly; to steal, esp. under circumstances which
involve a breach of trust; to pilfer, filtch;

And a purloiner
is:

a petty thief, a pilferer. (COED
1971: 2365)

Hence the
common definition of plagiarism is theft. All of this seems
straightforward enough, but, experience teaches that both students, and many
faculty, are very apt at excusing misdemeanors. The problem is that while some
people are genuinely confused, many have a vested interest in muddying the
waters because plagiarism can be a very profitable business that can lead to
employment, promotion and regular salary increases all at the taxpayer's
expense costing millions of dollars every year.

Unfortunately,
while there are some good books on plagiarism generally, such as Thomas
Mallon's Stolen Words: Forays into the Origins and Ravages of Plagiarism
(New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1989), very little has been written about
academic plagiarism. Therefore, it is important to provide clear examples of
what counts as plagiarism. To help clarify the situation the following
definition is proposed:

Plagiarism is the deliberate attempt to
deceive the reader through the appropriation and representation as one's own
the work and words of others. Academic plagiarism occurs when a writer
repeatedly uses more than four words from a printed source without the use of
quotation marks and a precise reference to the original source in a work
presented as the author's own research and scholarship. Continuous paraphrasing
without serious interaction with another person's views, by way or argument or
the addition of new material land insights, is a form of plagiarism in academic
work.

How this
definition works in practice is explained below. First, however, it is
necessary to remind readers that the successful academic plagiarist is like the
undetected embezzler. A bank clerk who takes $100,000 for one account is
clearly likely to be caught fairly quickly. Therefore, the skilled embezzler
steals $100 from 1,000 accounts over a ten year period on the assumption that
few people will miss $10 a year. Thus, embezzlers attempt to disguise illegal
transactions so that they look like genuine mistakes, or appropriate bank
charges, rather than theft. Academic plagiarizers act in a similar manner and
are unlikely to copy entire books. Instead they take sentences and paragraphs
from many books while at the same time providing false leads that make their
borrowings look like genuine mistakes or poor footnoting.

3. Types
of plagiarism.The following
forms of plagiarism were all found in various academic books and manuscripts,
some of which were written by established authors. The specific examples used
in this paper were created using citations from my book The Irony of
Apartheid (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 1981) to avoid possibly embarrassing
some well-known scholars whose work readers might recognize. Each section
begins with an original statement from my book. The statement is then
plagiarized to provide examples of the different ways a text may be
misappropriated. The nature of the offense is explained and an example of
correct usage is provided. The examples they may seem repetitive and boring,
but this is the only way one can stimulate the necessary debate.

3.1.
Straight plagiarism.This
occurs where only capitalization and sentence structures are changed and the
odd word is added or deleted. But, the original author is not acknowledged, nor
are quotation marks used. The minor change in wording, changed capitalization,
sentence structure and other visible features alter the appearance of the
passage giving the appearance that it is original work. The following examples
illustrate this technique:

Original:But
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the rights of the Afrikaner.
Only the National Party offered a Christian solution to South Africa's racial
problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in the view of Het Westen,
unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People were a Christian people,
therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian.(1)

Plagiarism:But
General Hertzog recognized the danger and fought for the rights of the
Afrikaner. Only the National Party offered a Christian solution to South
Africa's racial problems. The politics of the Nationalists, were in the view of
the newspaper Het Westen, thoroughly Christian. The Afrikaner People
were a Christian People, therefore their politics must of necessity be
Christian.

Correct usage:Hexham
writes "But General Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the
rights of the Afrikaner. Only the National Party offered a Christian solution
to South Africa's racial problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in
the view of Het Westen, unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People
were a Christian people, therefore their politics must of necessity be
Christian."(1)

3.2.
Plagiarism using a citation.Here
although the real author is acknowledged plagiarism takes place because the
original text is reproduced with only minor changes without using either
quotation marks or footnotes:

Original:But
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the rights of the Afrikaner.
Only the National Party offered a Christian solution to South Africa's racial
problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in the view of Het Westen,
unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People were a Christian people,
therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian.(1)

Plagiarism:Professor
Hexham brilliantly observes that Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for
the rights of the Afrikaner. Only the National Party offered a Christian
solution to South Africa's racial problems. The politics of the nationalists,
were in the view of Het Westen, unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner
People were a Christian people, therefore their politics must of necessity be
Christian.

Note: this is an example of plagiarism
even though the author acknowledges a debt to "Professor Hexham,"
because appropriate quotation marks are not used nor are we given a page
reference to the source. Note also the use of the word "brilliant."
In practice, plagiarists often use exaggerated descriptions of someone's work
before plagiarizing it. This is probably because we are all flattered when
someone says we are "brilliant." Therefore we are unlikely to look to
closely at a work or complain about the misuse of our own work by someone who
clearly likes us. Therefore, such terms are often triggers that warn us we are
about to encounter plagiarism.

Correct usage:Professor
Hexham observes that "Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the
rights of the Afrikaner. Only the National Party offered a Christian solution
to South Africa's racial problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in
the view of Het Westen, unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People were
a Christian people, therefore their politics must of necessity be
Christian" (1)

3.3 Simple
plagiarism using a footnote.A
reference is provided but quotation marks are still not used when academic
rules for citation demand their use and some words are slightly changed to make
the passage appear to be different from the original.

Original:But
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the rights of the Afrikaner. Only
the National Party offered a Christian solution to South Africa's racial
problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in the view of Het Westen,
unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People were a Christian people,
therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian.(1)

Plagiarism:In his
insightful book The Irony of Apartheid Dr. Hexham observes that Dr.
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up against the British for the rights
of the Afrikaner. Only the Nationale Partie offered a real solution to
South Africa's racial problems. The politics of Afrikaner Nationalists, were in
the view of Het Westen, entirely Christian. The Afrikaner Volk were a
Christian People, therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian.(1)

(1) Irving Hexham, The Irony of
Apartheid, chapter 7

Note: the flattering use of
"insightful", and minor changes to the text such as the substitution
of "Dr" for "General", and "Volk" for
"People." Note also that quotations marks are still not used even
though they are required, nor are we given an exact page number.

Correct usage:In his
book The Irony of Apartheid Dr. Hexham observes that "General
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up against the British for the rights
of the Afrikaner. Only the National Party offered a real solution to South
Africa's racial problems. The politics of the Nationalists, were in the view of
Het Westen, entirely Christian. The Afrikaner People were a Christian
People, therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian."(1)

3.4.
Complex plagiarism using a footnote.This
happens when various changes and paraphrases, from more than one page, are used
with a footnote but without appropriate quotation marks. Thus a reference is
given, although it may not be to exactly the correct page, and many words and
phrases are taken from the original text. Paraphrasing is used to condense
lengthy arguments. But, little or no indication is given that the passage is
paraphrased, nor are quotation marks used when needed. Another technique found
in this type of plagiarism is a deliberate attempt to change the appearance,
but not content, of the sentences, thus making the plagiarism less noticeable.
For example:

Original:Such
views articulated in the student magazines, also received clear, though less
detailed treatment in Het Westen. Afrikaners were reminded that they
were a Calvinist People with a duty to retain their nationalism.(1)
In the view of Het Westen, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church like
General Botha=s friend Herman Bosman were mistaken in arguing, like their leader
Andrew Murray, for the separation of religion and politics.(2)

Plagiarism:Such
views articulated in the student magazines, also received clear, though less
detailed treatment in The Westerner which reminded Afrikaners that they
were a Calvinist Volk with a duty to retain their nationalism.(1) In
the view of this newspaper, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church like Herman
Bosman, General Botha=s friend, were "mistaken in arguing, like Dr. Andrew Murray for the
separation of religion and politics" even though he was their mentor.(2)

Note: in the last example Het Westen becomes "The
Westerner"giving the impression that the author is translating from the
Afrikaans original. Note also the way the order of certain short phrases, like
"General Botha's friend," are changed around. This type of alteration
to the text disguises the extent of the plagiarism making it less easy to spot.
Finally, although part of the quotation is placed in quotation marks it is done
is such a way that the reader is led to believe that the writer is directly
quoting from the newspaper and not from The Irony of Apartheid.

Correct usage:Hexham
writes "Such views articulated in the student magazines, also received
clear, though less detailed treatment in Het Westen. Afrikaners were
reminded that they were a Calvinist People with a duty to retain their
nationalism."(1) Later he adds that "In the view of Het
Westen, ministers of the Dutch Reformed Church like General Botha’s friend
Herman Bosman were mistaken in arguing, like their leader Andrew Murray, for
separation of religion and politics."(2)

3.5 Plagiarism
with hanging quotations.Here the
plagiarist begins by using a quotation but continues to quote after closing the
quotation marks.

Original:Hertzog's
policies were also seen as an expression of the myth of apartheid. He, and he
alone, was represented as holding a realistic racial policy by which was meant
one which segregated black from white. "Natives have to learn that they
are not equal to whites," Het Westen declared. The native must
learn to recognize that white technology and industry has raised them from
barbarism. Too many people reacted emotionally to the race question and assumed
colored people could be given a greater say in the government of South Africa.(1)

Plagiarism:According
to Hexham "Hertzog's policies were also seen as an expression of the myth
of apartheid."(1) He, and he alone, was represented as holding
a realistic racial policy by which was meant one which segregated black from
white. The Afrikaans newspaper, Het Westen declared "Natives have to
learn that they are unequal to whites."(2) Hexham says this
meant that "the native must learn to recognize that white technology and
industry has raised them from barbarism."Clearly, in view of Het
Westen too many individuals reacted emotionally to the race question. Only
radicals assumed Colored People could be given a greater say in the Government
of South Africa.(3)

Note: the plagiarized passages are
sandwiched in between genuine quotations while yet again the reader is led to
believe that the author is citing directly from Het Westen when, in fact
they are still citing The Irony of Apartheid.

Correct usage:According
to Hexham "Hertzog's policies were also seen as an expression of the myth
of apartheid. He, and he alone, was represented as holding a realistic racial
policy by which was meant one which segregated black from white."(1) The
Afrikaans newspaper, Het Westen, declared "Natives have to learn
that they are not equal to whites."(2) Hexham says this meant
that "the native must learn to recognize that white technology and
industry has raised them from barbarism."(3) Clearly, in view
of Het Westen, "Too many people reacted emotionally to the race
question and assumed colored people could be given a greater say in the
government of South Africa."(4)

3.6.
Paraphrasing as plagiarism.Paraphrasing
without reference to the original source and extensive or continuous
paraphrasing, even when the source is mentioned, without the addition of
material, that seriously interacts with the paraphrased passages or add
significant new information, is plagiarism. This type of plagiarism is more
difficult to prove. Nevertheless, it is plagiarism. Legitimate paraphrasing
takes place only where the source is acknowledged and where the paraphrasing is
limited to material that is then discussed, explained, and argued about.

Acceptable
paraphrasing takes place when:

1) The paraphrasing does not
dominate a writer's work

2) Where the paraphrase is made
to allow the author to interact critically with another person's views

3) When the argument of the
original text is re-written in different words.

When an
academic article, chapter or book that purports to be original scholarship, as
demanded in a Ph.D. thesis, contains introductory and/or closing pages or
paragraphs written by an author followed by a paraphrase or paraphrased
passages that make up the bulk of the work then the article, chapter, or book
is plagiarized. Compiling the views of other people and passing them off as
one's own research is not scholarship. Nor can such works claim to be original
even though nobody else has produced exactly the same collection of compiled
opinion.

Originality
in scholarship demands original thought and critical reflection on the views of
others not mere repetition preceded or followed by inane comments. Only when an
author adds significant and original insights is paraphrasing justified. Even
then the norms of scholarship demand that all paraphrased passages are clearly
identified as paraphrases. For example:

Original:But
Hertzog recognized the danger and stood up for the rights of the Afrikaner.
Only the National Party offered a Christian solution to South Africa's racial
problems. The politics of the nationalists, were in the view of Het Westen,
unquestionably Christian. The Afrikaner People were a Christian people,
therefore their politics must of necessity be Christian(1) … Such
views articulated in the student magazines, also received clear, though less
detailed treatment in Het Westen. Afrikaners were reminded that they
were a Calvinist People with a duty to retain their nationalism.(2)

Illegitimate paraphrase:Standing
up for the Afrikaner's rights because of the dangers he saw looming, Hertzog
argued that a Christian solution to South Africa's racial problems was to be
found in the policies of the National Party. Nationalist politics were
according to Het Westen undoubtedly Christian and he Afrikaner People
must support them because they were a Christian People. Views like these were
expressed by students in their magazine …

Appropriate paraphrasing:Hexham
argues that standing up for the Afrikaner's rights because of the dangers he
saw looming, Hertzog argued that a Christian solution to South Africa's racial
problems was to be found in the policies of the National Party. Nationalist
politics were according to Het Westen undoubtedly Christian and he
Afrikaner People must support them because they were a Christian People.(1)
He also observes that Views like these were expressed by students in their
magazine.(2) The problem with Hexham's argument it that he pays far
too much attention to the views of Hertzog and the students who supported
Hertzog's views. He also fails to explain exactly what Hertzog meant by
"Christian" thus overlooking the fact that Hertzog was actually an
agnostic inspired by Bismark's son-in-law Count Keyserling. Consequently he
fails …

In the passage provided above
Hexham's understanding of Hertzog's position is paraphrased for the purpose of
criticizing it and showing the weakness of the argument. To do this the critic
first points out weaknesses in Hexham's general approach, then draws attention
to his failure to adequately define a key term, finally new information about
Hertzog's views are introduced. Thus the paraphrase serves a greater purpose
than simply repeating Hexham's views in other words and actually adds new
information that increases the understanding of the reader. When an entire
academic monograph consists of paraphrased passages, with only a few
explanatory comments that frame the paraphrasing, the book is plagiarized even
though the author continually refers to the original author of the material
cited and does not quote the author without quotation marks.

3.7.
Self-plagiarism.Some
people argue that self-plagiarism is impossible by definition because
plagiarism is theft and people cannot steal from their own work. But, this is
not correct in law. There are circumstances, such as insurance fraud,
embezzlement, etc., when it is possible to steal from oneself.

In the
Internet Humanist Forum, professor Paul Brian's of the University of
Montreal, argued that self-plagiarism "is also a theft since the author
leads the book-buyer to think that there is a new book of his on the market The
author is misleading his/her readers: to me, it is just the same thing as to
sell a second-hand car while claiming it's a brand new one" (The
Humanist Forum 7/13, 16 April 1992). Perhaps a better analogy is the used
car dealer who changes a car's odometer to make it appear much less used than
it really is. Such a practice is recognized to be illegal. So too
self-plagiarism is fraud (Brogan 1992:453-465).

Although
self-plagiarism in academic publications is a grey area, many universities
implicitly recognize the practice as fraudulent by publishing rules preventing
students from submitting essentially the same essay for credit in different
courses. There are also rules against someone submitting the same graduate
thesis to different universities. Among established academics self-plagiarism
is a problem when essentially the same article or book is submitted on more
than one occasion to gain additional salary increments or for purpose of
promotion.

Like all
plagiarism the essence of self-plagiarism is when the author attempts to
deceive the reader. This happens when no indication is given that the work is
being recycled or when an effort is made to disguise the original text. The
issue once again is one of deception.

Disguising
a text occurs when an author makes cosmetic changes that cause an article,
chapter, or book, to appear to be new when in reality it actually remains
unchanged in its central argument. Changing such things as paragraph breaks,
capitalization, or the substitution of technical terms in different languages
so that readers to believe they are reading something completely new is
self-plagiarism when these are the only changes an author has made to a text.

The
extent of re-cycling is also an indication of self-plagiarism. Academics are
expected to republish revised versions of their Ph.D. thesis. They also often
develop different aspects of an argument in several papers that require the
repetition of certain key passages. Thus it is not self-plagiarism if the work
develops new insights.

It is
self-plagiarism if the argument, examples, evidence, and conclusion, remain the
same without the development of new ideas or presentation of additional
evidence. In other words it is self-plagiarism when two works only differ in
their appearance. Self-plagiarism, however, must be carefully distinguished
from the recycling of one's work, that to a greater or lesser extent is legitimate
when it is presented to a completely new readership that otherwise would not
read the original work or when it is necessary to repeat old arguments and material
to make new points or significant modifications to old ones.

4.
Indications of plagiarism.The most
common indication of plagiarism is when someone writes something that contains
clearly different styles, such as a student essay with grammatically incorrect
opening and closing paragraphs enclosing a body of text containing near perfect
prose. In practice many plagiarists give themselves away in this way by copying
mistakes found the source they are plagiarizing.

For
example suppose an author says that A.J. Ayer described someone as "a literary
gadfly whose ideas are not to be taken seriously" and gives A.J. Ayer, Wittgenstein,
London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1984, p. 159, as a reference. Then when you
check the reference in A.J. Ayer's book you find that it was first published in
1985 and has only 155 pages the question of possible plagiarism must be taken
seriously. If it is discovered that an earlier book attributes exactly the same
phrase, e.g. "literary gadfly," to Ayer along with the same false
date and page number that then it is safe to conclude the author of the later
book plagiarized the earlier writer's work without actually reading Ayer's
book.

In such
cases plagiarism is proven because the impression given to the reader is that
the author of the later book was working with original texts when in fact they
based their work based on a secondary source. In these and similar cases
plagiarism can be proven because the author's text contains printing and other
mistakes found in an earlier source.

For
example, suppose someone wrote a book on Kant claiming that he based his ethics
on St. Paul's argument about love found in 1 Corinthians 13.13.1-13. It would
be natural to assume that the repetition of the chapter number "13"
in the reference to St. Paul was a printing error. The correct reference ought
to read 1 Corinthians13.1-13. If, however, it can be shown that several years
earlier another book, or academic article, on Kant contained an identical
mistake then the reader ought to look more closely at the two texts to see if
there are other indications of plagiarism. When the later author uses identical
arguments, including the repetition of the same words, as the earlier author
then plagiarism is clearly proven. In practice many plagiarists give themselves
away in this way.

5.
Discussion and caution.In
judging that an author plagiarizes great care must be taken to ensure that
careless mistakes, printing errors, inexperience, and even editorial changes
made by a press are not used as accusations against an innocent person.
Further, it is necessary to recognize "common usage" and the nature
of the writing itself.

For
example many basic textbooks contain passages that come very close to
plagiarism. So too do dictionaries and encyclopaedia articles. In most of these
cases the charge of plagiarism would be unjust because there are a limited
number of way in which basic information can be conveyed in introductory
textbooks and very short articles that require the author to comment on well-known
issues and events like the outbreak of the French Revolution, the conversion of
St. Augustine, or the philosophical definition of justice. Further, in the case
of some textbooks, dictionaries, newspaper articles, and similar types of work
both space and the demands of editors do not allow the full acknowledgment of
sources or the use of academic style references.

It should
also be noted that many more popular short pieces, like oral lectures, are
produced from old notes and memory. Professors often don't know from where they
got a particular definition or description of a well-known figure or event. As
long as such writing deals with things that are essentially public domain, even
though at times specific wordings may be very similar indeed, this is not
plagiarism because it does not involve deliberate fraud. For example, it is
almost impossible to describe the origins of something like the Watergate
Affair in 300 words without using almost identical words to anyone else that
attempts to describe the same event.

The
intent of the writer should is the key issue in recognizing plagiarism. For
example in the early years of this century the best-selling German author, Karl
May (1842-1912) was accused of plagiarism because his adventure stories
contained descriptions of landscapes and urban settings which were clearly
culled from travel books. May did not deny this. He simply argued that to judge
his works as plagiarized because he borrowed geographic descriptions in which
to set his stories was to totally misunderstand the function of the
storyteller. Someone spinning a yarn may borrow freely if they reuse the
original material in such a way that the final product is not dependent on what
has been borrowed to create the setting.

It is
therefore seems necessary to distinguish between academic and other types of
writing and to ask what is the reader led to believe an author is doing. If a
book or thesis contains academic footnotes, is written in an academic style,
and is presented as a work of original scholarship, then it must be judged as
such and measured against the accepted rules for citation found in sources such
as The Chicago Manual of Style. If it does not measure up to such
standards then it is possible that plagiarism has occurred.

A few
academics argue that provided footnotes are given plagiarism cannot be said to
have taken place. This view is completely wrong. In both the Napolitano v.
Princeton University Trustees case and the Texas Tech in Lubbock cases the use
of footnotes to mask a plagiarized text was judged to prove the deliberate
nature of the fraud (Cf. Mawdsley, 1985:6-7; and Mallon, 1989:159). Thus
academic authors who give the impression that they are following standard
procedures, by their use of footnotes etc., when they are actually borrowing
the words and ideas of others without appropriate references or quotation marks
are plagiarizing. This must be made absolutely clear in any statement on
plagiarism.

6.
Correct citation and quotation.To avoid
plagiarism it is necessary to know how to cite works correctly and use
quotations. For this The Chicago Manual of Style is invaluable. It
states:

10.1 Ideally, authors of works of
original scholarship present their arguments in their own words.

10.2 Whenever authors paraphrase
or quote from sources directly, they should give credit to the words and ideas
taken from others.

10.3 Commonly known facts,
available in numerous sources, should not be enclosed in quotation marks or
given a source citation unless the wording is taken directly from another. Also
not treated as quotations are proverbial, biblical, and well-known literary
expressions used as part of the author's text. (The Chicago Manual of Style,
1982: 282)

Although
these comments are very helpful, many people might be left wondering when they
ought to use quotation marks. The accepted rule of thumb is after four words.
That means you must use quotation marks for any passage copied from another
work containing five or more words. To help students avoid such problems many
university departments publish essay guides. These should be carefully read.
For example, the Department of Politics at the University of Calgary publishes
an essay guide: Write On: A Reference Manual for Students Research and
Writing which states:

If you use more than four words
from any source, put them in quotation marks and identify the source with a
reference mark.
(Tom Flanagan, Write On, Calgary, Department of Politics, 1989: 20)

Exactly
which reference system, and several are available, a writer chooses to use is
not important. What is essential is that the reader knows exactly which
sections of the work are original to the author and which depend upon the
thoughts and words of others. All sources must be documented and every
quotation has to be placed within quotation marks.

Anyone
wanting more help on this topic should read books like The Chicago Manual of
Style (Chicago, Chicago University Press, 2003, first edition 1949) , Kate
L. Turabian's A Manual of Style for Writers (Chicago, Chicago University
Press, 1996, first edition 1963), The Canadian Style: A Guide to Writing and
Editing (Secretary of State, Toronto : Dundurn Press, 1985), or one of the
many other texts available in academic bookstores.

7.
Conclusion.Finally,
I want to plead with colleagues that plagiarism be taken very seriously indeed.
We need agreed definition, examples, standards and punishments. As professor
Hoke Robinson argued on The Humanist Forum:

A single fraudulent grade could
in practice make the difference; a series of them certainly could. In this case
some other, presumably honest student who would otherwise have gotten the
scholarship, admission or job has been wronged. And the higher the level, the
greater the wrong, from the plagiarized intro-course essay to the term paper to
a masters and doctoral dissertation. The misrepresentation gets you on the
bench, and somewhere in the end, in the dark, somebody falls off.

Another wrong that's seldom noted
in cases like this is the wrong to those served by the people who obtained
their position through fraud. The professor...who faked his way through school
presumably serves his students...less well than the one whose credentials were
gained honestly ... there is a collateral effect ..."

(The Humanist Forum,
message 8/8, 2 April, 1992).

If
academics do not control professional standards, then other people will do it
for them. Granting agencies and government will eventually ask where their
money is going and why we did nothing when clear fraud occurred. Therefore, now
is the time to act by clearly identifying what plagiarism is and how it should
be dealt with among both students and faculty.

Martha Brogan, "Recycling
Ideas," College and ResearchLibraries, Vol. 53, No 5,
September 1992.

More
general works on plagiarism and academic fraud:

Alexander Lindey, Plagiarism
and Originality, Greenwood Press, Westport, 1974, an older work which has
some excellent examples and legal discussion but which, unfortunately, does not
deal with academic plagiarism.

Thomas Mallon, Stolen Words: Forays
into the Origins and Ravages of Plagiarism, Ticknor & Fields, New
York, 1989, which has a good descriptive chapter on academic plagiarism.